PollsDiscuss Rasmussen Explains Methodology Of Poll That Has Trump At 51 Percent Approval at the General Forum; Because Rasmussen polls consistently show a higher job approval level for President Trump than other polls they are attacked as ...

Rasmussen Explains Methodology Of Poll That Has Trump At 51 Percent Approval

Because Rasmussen polls consistently show a higher job approval level for President Trump than other polls they are attacked as inaccurate outliers. Never mind that Rasmussen was an outlier predicting the election outcome, the other polls are right this time.

Quote:

While many might wonder why Rasmussen consistently has Trump higher than other polls, managing editor Fran Coombs defended his company’s methodology on Laura Ingraham’s radio show Monday.

“It’s nonsense,” said Coombs, according to LifeZette. “All these pollsters that these guys like to rely on, as your listeners well know, had disastrous results in 2016. And to the best of our knowledge, I don’t think they’ve really corrected anything at all. So as far as I know, they’re probably still having disastrous results.”

Coombs explains how they conduct their polling

Quote:

One – Eliminate skewed results by screening out registered voters who are unlikely to vote.

Two – Rasmussen tracks daily using a 1,500 person sample, but adds 500 and drops 500 on a regular basis.

Three – The use of “robo-calling,” which allows respondents to talk to a machine instead of a real person.

Of course accuracy is a nonfactor to the Resistance, all that matters is attacking President Trump. An aggregate of polls must be used to water down Rasmussen.

Re: Rasmussen Explains Methodology Of Poll That Has Trump At 51 Percent Approval

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZRWinger

Because Rasmussen polls consistently show a higher job approval level for President Trump than other polls they are attacked as inaccurate outliers. Never mind that Rasmussen was an outlier predicting the election outcome, the other polls are right this time.

Quote:

While many might wonder why Rasmussen consistently has Trump higher than other polls, managing editor Fran Coombs defended his company’s methodology on Laura Ingraham’s radio show Monday.

“It’s nonsense,” said Coombs, according to LifeZette. “All these pollsters that these guys like to rely on, as your listeners well know, had disastrous results in 2016. And to the best of our knowledge, I don’t think they’ve really corrected anything at all. So as far as I know, they’re probably still having disastrous results.”

Coombs explains how they conduct their polling

Quote:

One – Eliminate skewed results by screening out registered voters who are unlikely to vote.

Two – Rasmussen tracks daily using a 1,500 person sample, but adds 500 and drops 500 on a regular basis.

Three – The use of “robo-calling,” which allows respondents to talk to a machine instead of a real person.

Of course accuracy is a nonfactor to the Resistance, all that matters is attacking President Trump. An aggregate of polls must be used to water down Rasmussen.

The claim that the pre-election 2016 polling results indicating that more people would vote for Hillary Clinton were "disastrous" is a myth. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by about 3 million votes. It was actually the Rasmussen poll that was in error because it showed that more people would vote for Trump than for Hillary Clinton and that didn't happen.

The polls were not measuring possible Electoral College outcome.

Fran Coombs actually identifies the problem with the Rasmussen polling - the elimination of registered voters that Rasmussen arbitrarily decides are unlikely to vote.

In the Rasmussen world blacks and Hispanics, that tend to vote liberal or for Democrats, are less likely to vote than whites based upon some statistics but that's a erroneous conclusion. In 2012 the black participation rate was higher than the national average participation rate for example.

We've known about this skewing of the polling results by Rasmussen where they choose to poll more white rural and suburban voters for years which is why the Rasmussen results have always been skewed Republican. The other polling groups and organizations don't selectively choose who they're going to allow to participate in their polls.

Always remember that the other polls of 2016 were very accurate in predicting that Hillary Clinton would receive more votes than Donald Trump and it was Rasmussen that predicted that Donald Trump would receive more votes and Rasmussen was wrong.

Re: Rasmussen Explains Methodology Of Poll That Has Trump At 51 Percent Approval

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShivaTD

The claim that the pre-election 2016 polling results indicating that more people would vote for Hillary Clinton were "disastrous" is a myth. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by about 3 million votes. It was actually the Rasmussen poll that was in error because it showed that more people would vote for Trump than for Hillary Clinton and that didn't happen.

The polls were not measuring possible Electoral College outcome.

Fran Coombs actually identifies the problem with the Rasmussen polling - the elimination of registered voters that Rasmussen arbitrarily decides are unlikely to vote.

In the Rasmussen world blacks and Hispanics, that tend to vote liberal or for Democrats, are less likely to vote than whites based upon some statistics but that's a erroneous conclusion. In 2012 the black participation rate was higher than the national average participation rate for example.

We've known about this skewing of the polling results by Rasmussen where they choose to poll more white rural and suburban voters for years which is why the Rasmussen results have always been skewed Republican. The other polling groups and organizations don't selectively choose who they're going to allow to participate in their polls.

Always remember that the other polls of 2016 were very accurate in predicting that Hillary Clinton would receive more votes than Donald Trump and it was Rasmussen that predicted that Donald Trump would receive more votes and Rasmussen was wrong.

Incorrect. The polls overwhelmingly predicted Clinton to win both the so called popular vote and the electoral and the Presidential election.

Even if you were correct, it would be plain stupid to poll an irrelevant number like popular vote when predicting the next president. Not that I believe that the MSM are anything but stupid.

Re: Rasmussen Explains Methodology Of Poll That Has Trump At 51 Percent Approval

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShivaTD

The claim that the pre-election 2016 polling results indicating that more people would vote for Hillary Clinton were "disastrous" is a myth. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by about 3 million votes. It was actually the Rasmussen poll that was in error because it showed that more people would vote for Trump than for Hillary Clinton and that didn't happen.

The polls were not measuring possible Electoral College outcome.

Fran Coombs actually identifies the problem with the Rasmussen polling - the elimination of registered voters that Rasmussen arbitrarily decides are unlikely to vote.

In the Rasmussen world blacks and Hispanics, that tend to vote liberal or for Democrats, are less likely to vote than whites based upon some statistics but that's a erroneous conclusion. In 2012 the black participation rate was higher than the national average participation rate for example.

We've known about this skewing of the polling results by Rasmussen where they choose to poll more white rural and suburban voters for years which is why the Rasmussen results have always been skewed Republican. The other polling groups and organizations don't selectively choose who they're going to allow to participate in their polls.

Always remember that the other polls of 2016 were very accurate in predicting that Hillary Clinton would receive more votes than Donald Trump and it was Rasmussen that predicted that Donald Trump would receive more votes and Rasmussen was wrong.

The polls were predicting the outcome of the Presidential election not the national popular vote. The polls were built by analyzing state by state elections then compiling the electoral votes from these analysis.

It is absurd to claim the polls relied on the national popular vote rather than the electoral college. The polls predicting Hillary winning the popular vote also had her winning the Presidency. The poll is predicting the Presidency.

__________________
The Democrat's strategy for the Trump Presidency is the same one used by Stalin's secret police chief "show me the man and I will show you the crime."

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to AZRWinger For This Useful Post:

Re: Rasmussen Explains Methodology Of Poll That Has Trump At 51 Percent Approval

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShivaTD

The claim that the pre-election 2016 polling results indicating that more people would vote for Hillary Clinton were "disastrous" is a myth. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by about 3 million votes. It was actually the Rasmussen poll that was in error because it showed that more people would vote for Trump than for Hillary Clinton and that didn't happen.

Clinton won California by over 4 million votes, so any pollster that didn't calculate that into their OVERALL tally is a nincompoop...Everywhere BUT California was a "disaster" for Hillary and the skewed pollsters begging for her victory...

Re: Rasmussen Explains Methodology Of Poll That Has Trump At 51 Percent Approval

I am a panel member on Gallup polling's. Do a questionnaire at least twice a month on a variety of issues. I've been a member for more than 6 years now. One thing I have noticed is the questions are often asked in such a way as to skew the answering. And usually to the left.

Still I participate but, with great care.

lately, Gallup has been stepping away from political polling.

Rasmussen does it much better. I trust their polling over Gallup.

__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

Re: Rasmussen Explains Methodology Of Poll That Has Trump At 51 Percent Approval

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShivaTD

Fran Coombs actually identifies the problem with the Rasmussen polling - the elimination of registered voters that Rasmussen arbitrarily decides are unlikely to vote.

Actually, that strikes me as being wise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShivaTD

In the Rasmussen world blacks and Hispanics, that tend to vote liberal or for Democrats, are less likely to vote than whites based upon some statistics but that's a erroneous conclusion.

Depends.

As a general rule, blacks and Hispanics do vote less often than whites.

But if racial and ethnic minorities are highly motivated--say, to vote against someone (or even against the party to which that person is attached)--this may not be the case.

__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007

According to your link to Real Clear Politics the only Electoral College prediction was by Real Clear Politics and it predicted that Clinton/Kaine would receive 203 Electoral College votes and Donald Trump/Pence would receive 164 leaving 171 Electoral College votes unaccounted for. Neither candidate was predicted to win based upon the Real Clear Politics Electoral College analysis prior to the election because neither candidate has enough Electoral College votes to win. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...llege_map.html

All of the other polls were popular vote polls, including the Rasmussen Reports polling data but I do stand corrected. Even Rasmussen predicted Hillary Clinton would win the popular vote. It was the IBD/TIPP Tracking poll that predicted Donald Trump would win the popular vote. For those polls that predicted Hillary Clinton would win the popular vote I believe the actual results fell within the statistical probable error of the poll that can typically be up to +/- 4% based upon the sample size. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...tein-5952.html

Re: Rasmussen Explains Methodology Of Poll That Has Trump At 51 Percent Approval

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShivaTD

According to your link to Real Clear Politics the only Electoral College prediction was by Real Clear Politics and it predicted that Clinton/Kaine would receive 203 Electoral College votes and Donald Trump/Pence would receive 164 leaving 171 Electoral College votes unaccounted for. Neither candidate was predicted to win based upon the Real Clear Politics Electoral College analysis prior to the election because neither candidate has enough Electoral College votes to win. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...llege_map.html

All of the other polls were popular vote polls, including the Rasmussen Reports polling data but I do stand corrected. Even Rasmussen predicted Hillary Clinton would win the popular vote. It was the IBD/TIPP Tracking poll that predicted Donald Trump would win the popular vote. For those polls that predicted Hillary Clinton would win the popular vote I believe the actual results fell within the statistical probable error of the poll that can typically be up to +/- 4% based upon the sample size. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...tein-5952.html

Again, if you are predicting the next president, it's plain stupid to poll an irrevalent number. RCP put Clinton ahead in the electorals, with a lot of undecided.

Re: Rasmussen Explains Methodology Of Poll That Has Trump At 51 Percent Approval

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrancSevin

I am a panel member on Gallup polling's. Do a questionnaire at least twice a month on a variety of issues. I've been a member for more than 6 years now. One thing I have noticed is the questions are often asked in such a way as to skew the answering. And usually to the left.

Still I participate but, with great care.

lately, Gallup has been stepping away from political polling.

Rasmussen does it much better. I trust their polling over Gallup.

In addressing bias in polling I've found one of the most extreme cases ever. I've taken over most responsibilities for my mother who's 97 and that includes paying her bills and reviewing her mail. She's been a lifelong Republican and she receives polls from the RNC that are just sent to Republicans. The polls are designed so that no matter what the issue is the only choice is to support the current Republican agenda. The choices could be described as a 1-5 scale of how much the person supports the agenda item with no choices to oppose it.

Of course today that agenda is based upon support for Donald Trump and many Republicans don't support Donald Trump. These Republicans have self-identified themselves with an interesting label...

Republican Exiles

I assume this group consists of many of the Never Trump Republicans from the 2016 election cycle.

Back to polling in general. Like all measurements there will be differences between the polls and the methodologies for each, including how questions are phrased for those being polled, are subject to peer review. Some can be said to lean one way or the other and it's up to us to determine how to best interpret the results of the polls.

I typically use the tried and proven way to obtain the optimal interpretative result when there are numerous sources measuring the same thing and it's based upon the same methodologies used where a panel of judges scores a competition event. Either the average (or total) score is used or, in many cases, the top and bottom scores are dropped and the rest of the scores are then averaged or totaled. Personally I prefer dropping the top and bottom scores that can be reflective of bias in the scoring and then averaging the rest of the scores. If you go with the top or bottom score then you're almost always walking into a "bias trap" if there's a significant difference between it and the other polls.

Of course everyone has to make their own choice on how they want to interpret the polling results when there are dozens of polls being conducted.